The new ‘Old Home Guard’ 14 July 2012
Dr. Ross L. Riggs ~ Security Consulting Investigations & Global Security Consulting
Defending one’s own home and one’s own family is a principle that leaders, military tacticians, contingency planners and soldiers have understood for millennia. Confronted with an indefensible city wall, an enemy taking up offensive positions on the hills not far from the broken gates, Nehemiah assigned men to work refortifying the walls immediately in front of their own homes first. Jerusalem in the sixth century B.C. was under the command of a wise leader. Hundreds of years later, Jesus taught a corollary. The hireling takes off when trouble comes, but the owners of the sheep stay to fight and protect what is theirs. Mercenaries find it much more palatable to concede today in hope of a better tomorrow than stand firm no matter the end. Those who guard their own know that without victory today, there may be no hope for tomorrow.
Americans enjoy the fruits of wisdom of our forefathers who understood the need for a strong national defense. A strong presence with a global reach protects our homeland keeping those who want to strike us leery of that awesome power. Our nation’s planners knew, however, that there were other risks that required a local presence with an equal ability, known today as the National Guard; augmenting the federal military. As well-trained yet, ‘locally owned and operated’ and available to each state’s governor.
But, they did not stop there. Wise leaders in the Constitutional Convention of the 18th century, even before the formal establishment of the divisions of the armed services; enumerated ten amendments to the new Constitution to assure its ratification. Of course, these amendments are the Bill of Rights. Second only to the right of free speech was, and is, the right of states to have a “well regulated militia” and for each citizen the right to “keep and bear arms.”
Two quick points of logic are necessary here. First, there is a clear distinction by the common reading that there are two groups, or entities, here whose rights are affirmed. One is each state of the union; the second is each individual citizen. The former has the right to keep a militia. The latter has two inter-dependent rights described.They are two specific and individual rights. The first is “To keep… arms.” It is the right of ownership.
It doesn’t say ‘keep registered’ or ‘keep and register…’ it reads “keep.” The second right within this Amendment for the citizen reads, “bear arms.” The clear and common reading in 1787 and today did not mean that the owner of arms had the limited right of carrying it around his property only, or in some cities today, only allowed to carry it inside his home. To bear it simply meant, and means, to carry it wherever one chooses to go. This was clearly understood then as both open and concealed carry. There was no distinction.
A caveat is necessary. The old adage, my right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins is in play here. A citizen, who owns private property, has the right to regulate if, when, and how another may carry a firearm onto it.
Any U.S. citizen who attempts to undermine or weaken the security of this country by depriving citizens of their Constitutional rights, in this case without a legally ratified new amendment, but rather by malfeasance and color of law should be charged with treason. This is particularly true of those who would conspire with our enemies to promulgate such an act as in the U.N. Small Arms Treaty.
To permit the open meeting of co-conspirators within the boundaries of the U.S., particularly within blocks of 9-11 Ground Zero, is a slap in the face of all Americans. At what point will we cordially invite the U.N. and every other group or individual here in the country who can only denigrate the nation and seek to find ways to hurt and disrespect it to go elsewhere? It is ludicrous for the American taxpayer to host the U(nfriendly) N(ations) at a cost of $20 million annually, over $2 billion for the new office, 22% of the entire annual budget and the costs keep adding up…[i] The Small Arms Treaty should be the final straw. That building would make a nice Holocaust museum and a Hebrew University campus for international studies as well as an American University center for Constitutional law.
“I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and cause me to tremble for safety of my country; corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in High Places will follow, and the Money Power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the People, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic destroyed.”[ii]